TheBigHurtIsBack

Yes, misquoting someone and then banning them repeatedly afterwards simply because said person corrected you on what they actually said, let's throw that in there. Banhammer in 3... 2... 1...

LOL, just when I keep thinking nothing you say could be any worse than some of the OTHER stuff I've heard you say. I just... wow.

I didn't realize Leyland was even gone. Did his contract simply end, or...? I have a hard time seeing a reason they wouldn't want to keep him around. Also funny seeing a name now coaching that was on the Astros team we beat in 2005... gives you a real sense that was now a very long time ago.

Glad to hear the Sox got their man. I really don't know much about Abreau but I've seen people salivating over him on the board for a while so hopefully this is a great signing.

What the hell? Since when was everyone around here anti-ADA? Is this place manic these days?

Yeah, a couple of those comments are pretty egotistical regarding himself but as far as the Cubs go he's correct, sadly.

Personally think this is dumb. It took HOW long to fire Walker? And Manto gets the boot after 1 season? That certainly seems odd.

Sure, it was illegal. My point is it was in no way related to his production on the field, at least in terms of raising his ceiling. PED's can do that, gambling can't magically make you better than you are. Pretty simple concept. I am pretty hefty on morals, believe it or not. But in my opinion it's irrelevant. Granted, and I meant to say, "supposedly" when referencing him being clean, but as long as he's been around there's been no proof so we can't hold that against him, otherwise by that logic no big hitter would be above suspicion.

PED's can physically alter your ability and allow you to go above and beyond your natural ability. Gambling on games can't. I don't know how I can be any clearer. What you are suggesting is absurd. Yes, it is. I disagree if the premise here is that your productivity on the baseball field as a player is not the be-all, end-all reasoning behind being in the hall of fame. Again, sports stars are not automatically role models. Just because they base their voting on something doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Period. Again, simply being written as a rule or law does not automatically make it right, or sensible. Whether or not the premise is indeed that is for another discussion, but my point stands. In my opinion, the all-time hits leader, who did nothing illegal or physically ability-altering to directly achieve that, should be in the hall of fame. That's my opinion and it's perfectly reasonable.

Riiiiiiight. He could have injected himself with a dose of GAMBLING to make himself play better. The hell... I can't do anything but laugh at that post, Jake. Because that makes absolutely no sense. If it wasn't out of context it would be quote worthy.

Once again... it has nothing to do with him PLAYING. Gambling has nothing to do with playing ability. This seems to be difficult for you to grasp for some reason. Sports players are not bound to being role models. I think Barry Bonds is a piece of s*** but had he never come under the suspicion of steroids you'd better believe he'd be deserving of being in the hall of fame. Was what Rose did disgraceful? Absolutely. Did it, at all, illegally alter or affect what he did on the field? No. What you do as a player on the field is first and foremost what is most important, otherwise the HoF is irrelevant. Sorry, but having a different viewpoint does not make me wrong. That's like saying that something simply being a rule or a law automatically makes it right. That's some very naive thinking. Pete Rose is the all-time hit leader and nothing suggests he went to anything illegal to do so, merely ability. He should be in the HoF. That's my opinion.

I missed the part why I have to agree. One of the best hitters in the history of the game not being in the HoF for something not related to what he did on the field invalidates it. If what you do on the BASEBALL FIELD is not the prime reason for being in the BASEBALL HoF then the whole thing is a joke and simply doesn't matter.

I don't give a flying f***. Being in the HoF is about what you did as a PLAYER. Sports stars are not role models by default; that it their decision. Based on what he did as a BASEBALL player, he should be in the BASEBALL HoF. Period. Absolute nonsense if EVER I have heard it. Like I said, you are in the baseball HoF because of what you did as a baseball player. PED's can alter your natural ability and help you put up artificial numbers as a player. Obviously gambling does not. Sorry wite, but I can't do anything but laugh at a post this silly.

Amen. Does anyone really give a f*** about what he did? Did he cheat at the game? Did he take PEDs? Unless something he did unfairly impacted what he did as a player, it shouldn't matter. Period. Pete Rose should be in the HoF, no question. As far as greg goes, why does anyone even bother trying to reason with him anymore? Lost cause if there ever was one.

Seriously I want to know why so many successful and/or adept players come here and suddenly take a huge nosedive. I'd like to blame it on something our staff or overall organization is doing but I can't assume that. But it bothers me quite a lot.

WTH? So we traded him for... things to be figured out later??? How the hell does that work? I've never heard of such a thing. Is there some sort of element in place to dictate what kind of deal can be worked out? I mean, say he comes back and ends up right back on the DL... what do we get then? How can something like this even work? How bizarre...

Come on. Are you trying to suggest managers aren't ultimately responsible for anything? My Lord, I was the first guy to start ranting here about how awful Guillen was around 2007-ish and EVERYONE was trying to make ME sound like the idiot and that Ozzie was just find (and many people, as people usually do, deflected and said "Well name someone better we could get!" rather than admit that he was horrible). What happened soon after? That's right, maybe 2 or 3 people (which include greg of all people) are the only ones who still think he was even remotely good. Ventura is awful and actually makes me miss Ozzie in certain regards overall. And for someone (although it wasn't you) to suggest a manager has no responsibility to monitor and act accordingly to high pitch counts is absurd. I don't know about being defiant, but who knows that the FO is saying to RV, if anything.

I've never been in that thread that I can recall, but would I be presumptuous if I said that I figure it's a bunch of ignorant, butt-hurt people still b****ing about LBJ leaving Cleveland and denying that he's the best player in the NBA right now? LBJ/Heat haters are some truly sad people. Anyways, carry on! BTW, I fully agree on selling off this year. I just wish I had more faith in the organization to do more of the right thing, especially in terms of fundamentals and farm system development.

Yeah. I actually sat through most of that awful season. But for some reason this season has really turned me off. Maybe because in theory we should be doing better than this.

No. In fact, the "baseball euphoria" faded away quicker this year than any other season I can recall watching. Plus with the hubbub about the Blackhawks... no chance.

My first game thread in years here and we've scored 10! But... we're still losing. Ha. I picked a good day.

Echoed. I could give Robin the benefit of the doubt and put it on his lack of experience managing but just having been a player, you would think, would be enough to not mess up some of the very easy decisions he's botched.

Everyone knows I hated Ozzie post-2006 and on but I would almost trade Robin to have Ozzie again... that's how much I have hated Robin's managing. It's been that bad.